Deferred entry of judgment pilot program.

Assembly Member Kalra’s proposal reformulates California’s deferred entry of judgment pilot for young defendants by limiting it to three counties—Butte, Nevada, and Santa Clara—and by expanding eligibility to include certain older youth, all within a framework of risk assessment and multidisciplinary-team oversight through the court system. The measure extends the pilot through January 1, 2029 and requires an evaluation by December 31, 2027, while shifting federal compliance oversight to the Office of Youth and Community Restoration with reporting to the Board of State and Community Corrections and data submissions to the Department of Justice.

Key mechanisms require a coordinated, county-level governance structure and set concrete procedures for participant selection and program operation. Eligibility now includes individuals who were 18–20 at the offense date, with 21–24-year-olds eligible if approved by a multidisciplinary team. Participants must be evaluated using a risk assessment tool, demonstrate an ability to benefit from services such as cognitive behavioral therapy, mental health and educational or vocational supports, and comply with juvenile-hall rules. A court may grant deferred entry of judgment if the participant consents and waives certain speedy-trial rights; otherwise, proceedings continue as in other cases. The program imposes a one-year custody cap in the juvenile hall, requires a reentry plan, and restricts contact with minors while in the facility. If performance is unsatisfactory, the court may enter judgment and return the participant to custody, with the MDT determining the transfer mechanism between juvenile hall and county jail.

Oversight, evaluation, and reporting are central to the bill’s structure. Counties must establish a multidisciplinary team that includes the probation department, the district attorney, the public defender, the sheriff, the courts, the board of supervisors, the health and human services department, and a youth advocacy group. An evaluation process, developed in consultation with key county partners, must use the risk assessment to determine eligibility, and the counties must report findings to the Assembly and Senate Public Safety Committees by the end of 2027, with the possibility of contracting an independent evaluator (including UC Regents) to conduct the study. Pre-approval of confinement sites is required, with a 30-day decision window, and the federal compliance review by the new Office of Youth and Community Restoration must be reported to BSCC. The bill introduces a sunset, providing that the chapter ends on January 1, 2029 unless extended by future statute, and clarifies that no state appropriation is created by the measure even as counties may bear ongoing program costs related to governance, services, data collection, and confinement approvals.